I’ve been reading a lot about Red One adoption in television series to save costs. In a Reel TV episode we linked to recently, Rodney Charters ASC talked about how they tested the Red on the set of “24″ for a number of reasons including cost savings. They ultimately chose to stick with film, due to rating the native sensitivity of the Red’s sensor at 250 ASA as opposed to the 500 ASA film stock they were shooting on. But he remained positive about the Red, and I know for a fact that Charters shot a pilot with the camera recently. Another show in the news is “ER,” which shot their last few episodes on Red after 15 years of shooting on four-perf film negative. Clearly, the current economy is helping the adoption of digital formats. So I thought it was interesting when I saw the following just this morning in a press release from Panavision. They are pushing two-perf negative instead of the normal four-perf as a way of saving 33%-50% on film stock and processing costs.

“Three recent productions – “Curve of Earth,” “Shoot First and Pray You Live” and “Gallow Walker” – are examples of films shot in 35mm two-perf that delivered the artistic vision of the production team, and saved roughly 50 percent on film negative and processing costs over standard four-perf, full-frame production.

Panavision now offers modified 35mm Panaflex cameras with two-perf movements available for rental. All handle Panavision’s range of legendary spherical film lenses from super speeds to Primos.

(For those unfamiliar with two-perf, the term refers to a modified film camera’s ability to record two images within the space usually inhabited by a single four-perf frame. “Perfs,” short for perforations, are the holes on either side of a piece of film that a camera sprocket engages to advance the film past the camera’s shutter.)

According to Andy Romanoff, Panavision Executive Vice President, Technical Marketing and Strategy, two-perf provides filmmakers with the ability to shoot 2.35 wide-screen images, usually attributed to higher-end systems, at reduced costs. It delivers a widescreen viewer experience but slices film stock and negative processing costs by 33 to 50 percent.”

There are clearly many other reasons why filmmakers would choose digital over film (or vice versa for that matter), for instance when shooting “Slumdog Millionaire” the SI2K camera was chosen for tight, dynamic scenes where the filmmakers needed to be very fluid and unrestrained. But right now, price seems to be a major driving point in the adoption of digital. And the traditional film industry is responding. We’re living in very interesting times as filmmakers.